From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11058 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2004 22:35:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11033 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2004 22:34:57 -0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20041228223457.11031.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20041228203205.19182.schnetter@aei.mpg.de> References: <20041228203205.19182.schnetter@aei.mpg.de> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/19182] Error messages seem to be printed slower X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg03809.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2004-12-28 22:34 ------- Subject: Re: Error messages seem to be printed slower On Dec 28, 2004, at 5:31 PM, schnetter at aei dot mpg dot de wrote: > > The call to setvbuf switches to line buffering, meaning that stderr is > flushed > only after every line and not after every character. I assume that > cc1 (as > opposed to f951) switches to line buffered stderr at some time, or else > outputs its error messages in some other way which is equivalent to > some > internal buffering. f951 outputs its messages character by character, > which > leads to an unnecessary overhead. Actually cc1 just uses fprintf instead of fputc so maybe that is the problem, maybe we should be doing our own buffering. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19182